If anyone knows what I can do to modify the Phatk kernel so I do not get the idles on BTC Guild please let me know.

Im using the modified phatk kernel, the last version adequate for poclbm, connected to uswest. Have no idles, last glitch was 15 hours ago and previously I went without any glitch for more 2-3 days.

Eleuthria: Have you changed the level of difficulty of the work you send to the miners? The miners speed (Mh/s) is fine and always around the real speed, but I am seeing more and more the last share over one minute, when previously it did almost never happened.

correct me if im wrong here... but wont this record keep going up as a function of the difficulty?

edit: I still have not found a block at btcguild. I have 2.98Million shares accepted here...

In theory no. Because difficulty goes up based on current network hash as people join. It should be believed that the same proportional number will join btc. So the time for found should remain the same. 6 mins/block to the whole network. And if btc hash remains the proportional as total network, it's at 50(something)mins/block here currently. I don't know what the exact time is.

In reality it won't happen that way tho. If more people join the network and less proportional joins btc (or none of the new miners) then btc will end up taking longer and longer. That's why it's so hard for new pools to start off. Getting people to join so it can hit critical mass and be large enough for people to stay.

"On very short rounds (< 1 minute), it is possible that one server is not sync'd up with the current round # before a block is found, meaning miners on that server won't have had any shares recorded for that round"

Does that mean if we got a few shares in on the short round, they'll be carried over to the next round instead of being applied to the short one, or they'll just be lost? (because neither scenario is favorable)

"On very short rounds (< 1 minute), it is possible that one server is not sync'd up with the current round # before a block is found, meaning miners on that server won't have had any shares recorded for that round"

Does that mean if we got a few shares in on the short round, they'll be carried over to the next round instead of being applied to the short one, or they'll just be lost? (because neither scenario is favorable)

If a server sync fails, it means the old server is still recording shares on the prior round. The sequence of events would be like this:Server A and B are working on Round #1500.Server A finds the block, updates to Round #1501, and tries to update Server B but fails.Server A is now recording Round #1501 shares, while Server B is still working on Round #1500.Server A finds a block before the fallback sync script executes, and updates to Round #1502, and updates Server B to the new round, skipping 1501 on Server B.

The rewards for #1500 would not be recorded until after server B had moved past that round, so Server B users didn't lose any shares, but they were applied to the Round #1500 instead of #1501.

This was only a "problem" when we were running with 7+ servers, where connection issues could easily occur between round synchronization. It only happened a few times, normally between euro and US servers.

Since consolidating to two servers, this has not happened. The sync script is much more aggressive at retrying. However, there is always a chance of it happening if something prevents the two servers from communicating a new block with each other, so I've left the warning there.

I know this may be a bit early to ask, but do you have any plans to add NameCoin mining support when the merge mining starts sometimes in September?(est.)

I'm looking into it, but I'm not rushing for the chance. I personally feel that namecoins are a waste of space. Their adoption will be limited to a subset of users even smaller than TOR. At least TOR serves a purpose.

That said, I'm waiting to see if anybody modifies pushpool to work with merged mining. Merged mining with pools is going to be very tricky to implement, especially when a pool is already up and running.

I am glad that some people see their income has gone up (previous post a while ago on this page)...but in my case,while my speeds are pretty consistent on two of my miners at 385 Mh/s and 285 Mh/s, respectively, btcguild often records them much much lower...my income has actually gone DOWN today...from average 0.0214 for 1.183 Gh/s (both 96 hr averages) to 0.0173 for 1.183 Gh/s today.